Drinking alcoholic beverages is, of course, forbidden in Islam. But Islamic law asserts authority over unbelievers, and even though the letter of the law holds that non-Muslims are allowed to drink alcohol, they are not to do so publicly, so as not to cause Muslims offense. When this group of Muslims saw a non-Muslim drinking openly in London, they acted to teach him his place as a dhimmi. British authorities, meanwhile, are just relieved that no “Islamophobia” was committed.
“Gang of five men ‘smashed American tourist’s eye socket with bottle after they saw him drinking in east London street – three days after he arrived in Britain,'” by Lizzie Edmonds, Daily Mail, June 25, 2014 (thanks to all who sent this in):
A gang of men attacked an American student while he was drinking in the street – grabbing a glass bottle from his hands and smashing it over his head, a court was told.
Francesco Hounye, 23, from Florida, had been in Britain for just three days when he was set upon by the men while he was walking home with a friend in Shadwell, east London.
Shaleem Uddin, 20, Shadhat Hussain, 19, Kamrul Hussain, 22, and Massom Rahman, 22, targeted Mr Hounye when they saw him swigging from a bottle of Jagermeister.
They then chased him, beat him, and smashed the bottle over his head, Snaresbrook Crown Court heard.
CCTV footage shows Mr Hounye being kicked mercilessly as he lay crouched in the road.
The student suffered extensive injuries – including a smashed eye socket.
A fourth man, Samad Uddin, 24, is on trial for grievous bodily harm after the four others admitted their roles in the attack.
Uddin claims he is a victim of mistaken identity.
Paul Casey, prosecuting, said: ‘This case involves a group attack involving all five of these men on one person, Mr Francesco Hounye.
‘The prosecution’s case, in a nutshell, is that he was caused injuries, really serious injuries – grievous bodily harm.
‘All of them were willingly involved in that attack, all of them played a part.
‘Two in particular played the most serious role, Shaleem Uddin and Samad Uddin.
‘Shaleem Uddin used the bottle to strike Mr Hounye over the head, causing him severe cuts to the side of his head.
‘Immediately prior to that, Samad Uddin and a number of others were involved trying to wrestle the bottle from Mr Hounye.’
‘During the course of the attack Samad Uddin aimed a number of kicks to Mr Hounye whilst he was prone on the ground, including one which CCTV shows his right foot connecting with some force with Mr Hounye’s head.’
Mr Hounye, who was too terrified to go out in London after the incident and has since returned to Florida, was attacked while with a friend on New Road, east London, on June 17 last year.
Mr Casey continued: ‘Both of them had been drinking alcohol and Mr Hounye had a bottle of liquor with him – the brand was Jagermeister.
‘They passed a group of young males and this group of young males – principally the five defendants – attempted to speak to the two men.
‘The two men perceived their attitude and body language to be threatening and intimidating so they continued on their way.’
But the gang pursued the pair of friends down the road and to the junction with Commercial Road.
‘When they reached the junction the two men stopped and they attempted to speak to the men who were following them.
‘The two men were confronted and surrounded.’
In the CCTV footage a man said to be Samad Uddin can be seen taking hold of Mr Hounye’s shoulder.
The victim was then grabbed from behind by a second male and other members of the gang wrestled the bottle from his clutches.
‘The first punches are thrown at Mr Hounye, the bottle is wrestled from him, Shelim Hussain smashes him over the head with the bottle,’ said Mr Casey.
It is alleged that Samad Uddin is the man seen kicking Mr Hounye across the road after he broke free and attempted to flee.
Mr Hounye was then pounced on by the mob – with the student punched against the wall
‘He is kicked and punched by a man, the prosecution say is Samad Uddin,’ said Mr Casey.
Mr Hounye was crouching in the street while a thin figure, claimed to be Uddin, aiming a forceful kick to the side of his head.
The gang ran off when a passer-by intervened.
Uddin was arrested in April this year after he was recognised by a police officer who had seen the CCTV footage, the court was told.
Samad Uddin, of Shadwell, east London, denies causing GBH with intent.
Shaleem Uddin, of Whitechapel, has admitted GBH with intent.
Kamrul Hussain, also of Whitechapel, Shahdat Hussain, of Newham and Masoom Hussain of Whitechapel, have admitted causing grievous bodily harm.
The trial continues.
Angemon says
Didn’t this take place last year?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/american-student-scarred-for-life-by-bottle-attack-just-three-days-after-arriving-in-britain-8899329.html
Mirren10 says
Yes, but this is an update on the progress of the *trial*.
You’ll note that there is not one word about the **reason** for this vicious and cowardly attack; ie: these scum consider Brick Lane to be a ‘muslim area’, therefore, as Robert says, these sh*&t bags felt offended, and were teaching him his place as a dhimmi.
There will be more and more of this, as these mohammedan lowlifes carry on spreading and infesting themselves all over the UK.
But not to worry; ‘call me dave’ keeps telling us about the ”wonderful contribution” mohammedans make to our society. So everything is absolutely OK, and if we are alarmed, and horrified, that’s because we’re ‘racist islamophobes’.
Charli Main says
Muslims that state that British laws don´t apply to them and that they are subject only to the laws of sharia should be deported forthwith.
All those Muslims that refuse to adopt and adapt to the culture of the society that has given them a home should be deported along with them.
YES, I AM A RESOLUTE AND UNMOVABLE ISLAMOPHOBE. IF YOU DON´T WANT TO BE BRITISH—-GO HOME TO WHATEVER COUNTRY YOU OR YOUR ANCESTORS CAME FROM.
to the best of my knowledge, you don´t this kind of sh*t from the other immigrant communities living in Britain.
Mirren10 says
”Muslims that state that British laws don´t apply to them and that they are subject only to the laws of sharia should be deported forthwith.
All those Muslims that refuse to adopt and adapt to the culture of the society that has given them a home should be deported along with them”
Indeed. I’m with voegelinian, **all** of them should be deported, except those who publicly apostasise, and integrate themselves fully to **our** way of life.
” … to the best of my knowledge, you don´t this kind of sh*t from the other immigrant communities living in Britain”.
No, I’ve yet to hear of the Chinese, or Sikhs, or Hindus, or **any** other immigrant community behaving in this way. **Only** mohammedans.
PRCS says
“Muslims that state that British laws don´t apply to them and that they are subject only to the laws of sharia should be deported forthwith.”
What are England’s laws concerning citizens born in England? Do your laws allow their deportation? And where would Muslims born there be deported to?
Wouldn’t the appropriate response be to make it quite clear that British laws do, indeed, apply to them?
Such was certainly made clear to Lee Rigby’s two Muslim killers:
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/2/26/lee-rigby-londonattack.html
eib says
More proof.
The English are the new Irish.
Ivan Bogdanov says
Care to explain this racist remark?
eib says
Why, they should be deported to MECCA, of course!
What Muslim would turn down a one-way trip to everything that’s holy?
JAMES says
When you bend your laws to accommodate other peoples laws
soon those people will bend you to their laws.
Janet Pickel says
Yes, our western societies should not put up with any Sharia law. If Muslims do not like our western culture, society, and laws they must return to their own countries. The West is committing suicide when it allows Sharia practices to go unchallenged. No cowardice, no backing down.
David Bligh says
Whenever this happened, it reinforces my belief that the only legitimate tourists in some countries should be the US military.
gravenimage says
David, I don’t believe the problem was *the tourists*, but the vicious Mohammedan “residents”.
mariam rove says
this video should be shown all over America, so people can see for themselves what Sharia laws are all about. M
Jerry says
All Muslims refuse to adapt and consider their “religious laws” superior to and above all other law, therefore all Muslims should be deported.
There is no such thing as a “moderate Muslim”.
sufis usually follow a non violent strategy and wish to convert all through exemplary good deeds.
However, Hassan Al Bana started off as a Sufi but after the fall of the last Islamic Empire became dissatisfied and impatient to achieve Islamic goals and founded the Muslim Brotherhood, now banned as a terrorist organisation even in Egypt, partially having inspired the rise of Al Qaeda, and the ideological parent of Hamas, and organisation comitted not only to the goal of destroying Israel and killing off all “Zionists” but also sharing Muhammed’s genocidal goal aspiring to the extermination of all Jews of this planet.
See, in general the English translation of the “Hamas Covenant” at
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp
and in particular Article Seven thereof.
Now, most readers, who are not Jewish would ask:
“What the heck does it have to do with me? I am not Jewish!”
The answer is simple: Not much!
Jews are first on the list!
You are only next!
PRCS says
There are, indeed, “moderate” Muslims.
Every “radical Musllm”, Muslim “extremist”, “radicalized Muslim”, and every follower of “radical Islam” was a moderate Muslim at some time in their lives.
Some of them–most according to various studies– remain “not fully compliant” well into their adulthood and old age.
It’s hard to imagine that an Afghani Muslim woman thinks wife beating is a good thing.
SteveInSC says
If we were talking Baptists instead of Muslims, we’d describe a “moderate” Baptist as a “backslider” (i.e., one who is only a Baptist out of habit or for appearance or convenience) as opposed to “born again” Baptists (i.e., True Believers). (Of course, it is the true believers who label others as backsliders rather than outsiders observing both groups.)
Similarly, we could conclude that a so-called moderate Muslim is not a true believer. The true believers are the throat-cutters. The moderates fear the throat-cutters and do not speak up or turn them in or do anything that will reveal them as “moderates” to the throat-cutters. Oddly, it is the uninformed outsider, observing both groups, that labels the one group “moderates” and the other “extremists.” The throat-cutters (i.e., extremists) don’t call the moderates moderate; they call them apostates, or sometimes infidels. They call the uniformed outside observe an infidel. And, they will kill them both when they get the chance.
Just as any Baptist backslider can discover the true faith of Christianity and be born again, so, any moderate Muslim can suddenly discover the true faith of Islam and become a throat-cutter. None can be truly trusted.
voegelinian says
PRCS also has a magic show on the weekend where puts his power of mind-reading hundreds of millions of Muslims to good use for the much milder feats of guessing which card someone is holding or what number they’re thinking of.
gravenimage says
PRCS wrote:
It’s hard to imagine that an Afghani Muslim woman thinks wife beating is a good thing.
……………………………….
Certainly, there are some Muslim women who oppose wife beating—but a surprising number of Muslimahs *do* condone wife beating:
http://www.data.unicef.org/child-protection/-span-style-text-transform-none-attitudes-towards-wife-beating-span-
There are also Muslim women who condone child marriage and honor killings—including Rezali Mehil, a Shi’ite woman living in Britain who often posts here at Jihad Watch, and has been quite vocal in her defense of such savagery.
For a significant percentage of Muslim women, Islam trumps their own safety—and even their own lives and those of their daughters.
Janet Pickel says
I agree. The goal of Islam is clear convert everyone to Islam, kill or treat as second class citizens those who will not convert to Islam. The west has to take a stand against this and if it does not the west and its culture will be destroyed. Also you are correct, the Jew is attacked first and then the Islamists will turn on everyone else. Jews are the canaries in the mine shaft so to speak. So don’t let Jihad gather strength; put the Islamists down now.
eib says
Quote:
Shaleem Uddin, 20, Shadhat Hussain, 19, Kamrul Hussain, 22, and Massom Rahman, 22 . . . .
end
Are these English names???
Englishmen???
Representatives of Britain and British culture?
Or are they foreigners representing a conqueror on British soil who is determined to destroy the historical culture of England?
My guess is the latter.
Ice Star says
I thought they had “hate crime” laws there. This looks like a hate crime to me.
Charli Main says
Muslims don´t commit ” hate crimes”. They are simply practicing their faith. Any attempt to prosecute them would be a violation of their human and religious rights. Their Koran given right to rape, murder and steal as and when they fancy.
Reality Check says
Typical Daily Fail – it publishes an article about Muslims attacking innocent people in a Christian country’s streets and then stops its readers from saying anything about it by not opening a comments section below. I have seen this time and again and I decided not to waste my time a long time ago.
Or they will write:
“Comments are not accepted for legal reasons.”
“The comments have been moderated in advance.”
“We no longer accept comments on this article.”
Mimicking freedom of speech and yet taking it away – that’s Daily Fail for you.
Mirren10 says
“Comments are not accepted for legal reasons.”
This is, in fact, perfectly legitimate. The trial is **ongoing**, therefore comments are not allowed because the case is still sub judice. Don’t you have that law in Bulgaria ?
Whatever you may think about the Daily Mail, you should also concede it is one of the few newspapers in the UK that actually brings this sort of thing to the attention of the public, which is why I read it, along with the Telegraph.
Reality Check says
“Whatever you may think about the Daily Mail, you should also concede it is one of the few newspapers in the UK that actually brings this sort of thing to the attention of the public, which is why I read it, along with the Telegraph.”
Oh, I think many things about Daily Mail, Mirren, but the one that stands out is how I burnt with shame when this despicable rag published a series of articles portraying my beloved country as a severely underdeveloped cesspit of poverty and despair, full of filthy brown-skinned people living in slums.
Guess what? The brown-skinned people with rotten teeth in those photos were not the real Bulgarians but Gypsies. But hey, who cares? No facts and truths should get in the way of a good propaganda story, right?
Shall I mention all the lovely British people who posted the most disgusting comments I’ve ever read without even having met a single Bulgarian in their lives? What about my comments, which never got published by Daily Mail because I tried to defend the good name of my country against your virulent xenophobia?
And as for Telegraph, I have a couple of things to tell you, too – so far it has removed at least two comments of mine against Islam, although it poses as the mouthpiece of those worried about it. Your national press is so fake and so manipulative that it makes me sick, so I’ve stopped trying to say anything there.
Ivan Bogdanov says
‘Shall I mention all the lovely British people who posted the most disgusting comments I’ve ever read without even having met a single Bulgarian in their lives?’
You have a live example of this racism right here on JihadWatch. Following is a comment by ‘eib’ posted above.
eib
June 25, 2014 at 1:37 pm
More proof.
The English are the new Irish.
mark says
When things get this bad in a country that favors brutes, then I have to say it: you have to gather your own kind together and meet violence with retribution. You have to take back your cities and your streets. This is no time to be loitering around with a bottle in your hand. We have to be more vigilant than that now.
Ivan Bogdanov says
Robert:
In the past you have been quick to banish posters who disagreed with the In the past you have been quick to banish posters who disagreed with the demonstrably bigoted and authoritarian bullyboy tactics of the ignoble Philip Jihadski, at jihadski’s insistence. He now implies he has special dispensation from you; a trademark of the arrogant and over-confident. I quote him directly; ‘I’ve been here for years. Spencer lets me get away with a lot.’
Those quick to disparage and denounce others, with impunity, display the hallmarks of Fascism, Communism and Islam. False inferred familiarity and subsequent implied entitlement are characteristics of the very ideology this site proclaims itself in opposition to.
Over the last several years I’ve noticed an increased hubristic sense of self-entitlement in this individual. Those who challenge him are attacked, castigated, dismissed and smeared at will by him.
Is this the impression you want your readers to leave with upon visiting your site?
At a minimum he must be held to the same standard he visits upon others. Failure to rein in this conceited poseur has consequences to the reputation of not only this site but of you personally. He himself must conform to the standard he manipulates you to impose on some of his victims. I ask you to conduct a review of his behavior over the last few years and his history of confrontation with those he disagrees with. His journey from agreeable anti-jihadist to authoritarian bully has been gradual; similar to the slow jihad we all fear.
Ivan Bogdanov says
One ‘In the past you have been quick to banish posters who disagreed with the’ too many. Apologies.
Ivan Bogdanov says
Robert:
Who is monitoring your posters? The behavior of ‘eib’ and ‘Philip Jihadski’ would not be tolerated at http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/ or http://gatesofvienna.net/.
I expect the same standard from you.
Jay Boo says
@Ivan Bogdanov
I don’t really know you nor do I pretend to be fully aware of your history with PJ
But, please try to forgive me for mentioning that regardless your differences with PJ your long appeal to Robert was not worded very well.
It comes off sounding as tattle tale and
Really
Really
Really
Really
Really
PATHETIC
Then again, I could be wrong
Gamaliel says
Obama is fast tracking their immigration into the U.S.. Soon it won’t be possible to hide in Florida any more.
richard Sherman says
Winston Churchill wisely said: “Islam in a man is as dangerous as rallies in a dog”
richard Sherman says
Typo…sorry…rabies or hydrophobia…Churchill understood every Muslim is infected with it..
Mannie says
The UK is a violent, dangerous place; much more violent than the US. Americans often fail to realize this, and get in to trouble. Between drunken pub leavers, and mohammedan swine, you don’t want to be on the streets at night, particularly at pub closing time. Even in small local villages, decent people get off the streets at pub closing time. They cut the mohammedans way too much slack in taking over their cities, although the Brits staunchly deny it.
We just don’t have that in the US. Plus, we can carry guns in the Civilized states.
dumbledoresarmy says
I observe, in this particular instance, that the mohammedthugs do not appear to have had guns or knives.
It was straightout physical thuggery – five prowling thugs ganging up on two men who wished to avoid conflict and who were probably not *trained* in physical combat.
Had the young American and his friend had *any* sort of fight training – boxing, or a martial art such as judo, karate, kung fu, tae kwon do, krav maga, take your pick – under their belt, the outcome of this encounter would likely have been very different. And the bottle itself, had the American been trained to think combatively, could have been used by *him*, first, as what my dear father calls an “equalizer”.
My advice to the young American – of whom we hear that he was ” too terrified to go out in London after the incident” – would be this: get thee to a martial arts instructor. Because this sh*t won’t stay in the UK; it’s *already* in the USA. It’s easy for Americans to say, “they won’t do this because Americans have guns”…yeees, and that means that American-resident *Muslims* will have guns **too**, so the gun side of it is neither here nor there.
Final observation – a pack of five mohammedans attacked two infidels. But then.”The gang ran off when a passer-by intervened.”
Five vs two; one of the two is downed; but even so, when a third person steps in on the side of the *two*, the five run off. I’d like to know who that “passer by” was. Unlikely to have been a mohammedan. A brave man, whoever he was: he confronted *five* murderous mohammedthugs who had downed one person and were getting ready to get stuck into another.
There is, perhaps, a lesson in this. The lesson I take away is a/ infidels need to be *able* to defend themselves b/ and able to work together and c/ willing to intervene on behalf of *other* infidels who are being attacked by mohammedthugs, because even a large number of mohammedthugs may suddenly “buckle” when confronted by determined intervention.
Mirren10 says
”The UK is a violent, dangerous place; much more violent than the US. Americans often fail to realize this, and get in to trouble. Between drunken pub leavers, and mohammedan swine, you don’t want to be on the streets at night, particularly at pub closing time. Even in small local villages, decent people get off the streets at pub closing time. ”
What absolute **crap**.
I live in a ‘small local village’, and I can assure you there are no ‘drunken pub leavers’, at closing time, or any other time.
When my husband and I go into *town* occasionally, we quite often meet friends in the pub. Yes, some people do get drunk, but are invariably good tempered about it.
*Where*, exactly, have you been in the UK, that leads you to say this nonsense ?
asdf says
This is why Americans treasure our right to self-defense.
Nancy Figueroa says
Anyone with a violent tendency, as demonic as it can go, would be attracted to Islam because Islam provides an environment to condone a person’s abnormal obsession with violence, and that person will be considered a devout religious person and accepted in Islam. Same with any pedophile who wants to practice his vice with a condoning audience. It is no wonder that Islam recruits in Prisons.
I recently asked a family member who works as a Correction Officer about this recruitment. He said sure they convert to Islam because they are given special treatment and protection by the Islamic clergy, but they still do not repent for their previous lifestyle of sin, because they don’t need to, they can now lie, steal, murder in the name of a religion and vent their violence and feel justified they are doing right. This is as crafty as the devil himself. For shame that it is even being peddled as a religion.
andrew sapia says
it was barely 100 years ago when you could be hung in Brittan for far less. I forget the actual figure but there were hundreds of crimes for which you could be hung not that long ago. This is modern Brittan along with most of what they call the modern world where the criminals are coddled and we need to understand them and the socio-economic reasons that cause them to commit their crimes. Horseshit, go back to the old system of hang em by sundown once a jury of your peers has pronounced you guilty and you watch how quickly this nonsense stops. It is ridiculous that a misdemeanor crime like drinking in public can result in a beat down from a bunch of foreign savages. It is completely insane that the once great Brittan has been reduced to dhimmitude.
Mirren10 says
” It is ridiculous that a misdemeanor crime like drinking in public can result in a beat down from a bunch of foreign savages”
Actually, it isn’t even a misdemeanour:
Drinking in public is legal in England and Wales – you may carry a drink from a public house down the street (though it is preferred that you request a plastic glass to avoid danger of breakage and because the taking of the glass could be considered an offence of Theft as only the drink has been purchased), and you may purchase alcohol at an off-licence and immediately begin drinking it outside. Separately, you may drink on aeroplanes and on National Rail trains, either purchasing alcohol or consuming your own.
In certain public places, it may be required (requested) for you to stop drinking. It is not illegal to drink in these areas, contrary to popular misconception,[12] but, in these areas, if requested by police to stop drinking, you must (may) then stop drinking and surrender the alcohol, both open and closed containers.[13] These are formally known as Designated Public Places Orders (DPPOs), and were allowed by The Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 (CJPA); they are more popularly known as ‘Controlled Drinking Zones’ (CDZs).[12]
(Wiki)
jus wundrin says
Meanwhile hussien obama demanded an apology…..from the ale swilling victim of course, and will release 3 more GTMO detainees for compensation.
cheekturner says
One huge point seemingly missed due to Rezali (AKA Ivan and Thrush) and the other trolls deflecting from the subject is the fact that bystanders had the opportunity to step in but failed to do so with one exception. This is an indictment on the British public frightened into inactivity lest they become the victim of a lawsuit brought about by the antagonists, human rights and the rest of the bovine effluent usurped by these ragheads. Time for vigilantes methinks.
gravenimage says
Gang of five men ‘smashed American tourist’s eye socket with bottle after they saw him drinking in east London street
……………………………
These weren’t “men”, of course—these were Mohammedans, acting as the “religious police” in Brick Lane, a “Muslim area” that they have rendered a “No Go” Zone.
And a Muslim gang of five attacking two victims is not at all unusual—they like odds like that. And notice how savage the attack was—this wasn’t just some fist-fight.
Kudos to the bystander who stepped in against the attackers—it is clear that Muslim thugs don’t expect *any* real resistance from the Kuffar, but the cowards soon run whenever Infidels *do* step up.